Hi,

1) If your structure is a tree - it's usually 3 levels deep. If your structure has buckets and bullet points - 2 levels is enough

2) Here is the approach to analyzing data:

1. Ask the interviewer for a minute to analyze the chart / table

2. In your mind formulate the question you have to answer

3. Look at the chart and define the type (pie chart, line chart, etc). Read the chart title. Read the legend

4. Analyze the chart / table. Look for: Trends, comparisons, % shares, etc. Look for unusual things (consultants love to integrate these traps in charts) - correlations, outliers, etc

5. Ask clarifying questions if required

6. Provide your conclusion. You should not just describe the chart but also derive the conclusions. There should be at least one major conclusion plus any additional conclusions you can make. You can also provide your hypothesis on what can be the root causes / consequences

7. Based on the interviewer's feedback, prioritize the most important information, and define the next steps.

Best

1. Critical thing is that you are concise and explain your hypothesis. For Bain the focus is on your A1 or your "answer first". Provided the structure is logical, allows you to help answer the question, and allows you to frame your A1. that is all that really matters. So if you have a hypothesis that the falling profit might be driven by a market wide factor, such as new entrants, you could break profit into revenue and profit and then revenue into market share and market size. The competitor issue would now show up as a hypothesis for the driver of losing market share. You should avoid saying "I will look at A & B" and breakdown to "C & D" without explaining the A1.

2. As for the structuring of insights, I prefer the second framing. An observation is not really that useful without the "so what". In the first way you structured the answer, you run the risk of simply describing the data, rather than focusing on the insights.